Coup? Not even close. It wasn't sudden—people on Capitol Hill knew it was coming. It wasn't violent—sans the case of Ashley Babbit being killed. This fella is going to seize power from the government?
[ATTACH=full]23114[/ATTACH]
It certainly wasn't peaceful—protest seldom are. It most definitely wasn't an insurrection or a coup—by the very definitions of both words.
It was trespassing just as we've seen the convictions reflect.
Where are all of these people that say those involved shouldn't be held responsible? Is this not like those who repeat the line "white supremacy is an existential threat to democracy" but when you ask "where and whom" there's no clear answer? And I don't mean exercise.
14 years in academia and you seem lost on the definition of intimidation. The law, as it reads, doesn't say "except for the sidewalk." But allow me to circle back here. What was the purpose, the goal, of those protesters outside of his personal residence? Through their protest they were attempting to influence the upcoming decision from the SCOTUS. Are we going to call a group yelling during all hours of the night an act that wasn't intended to influence a decision? We had leaders in Congress encouraging people to not give them a minute of rest. That's not intimidation? As defined, it's an action meant to compel a behavior. Their actions were what? To compel a SC member to vote a certain way.
Or is this just another case of redefining words like we've seen with recession and vaccine?
People believe they are just as smart as these leading experts. Okay. When you see someone labeled as an expert, but continually wrong in their expertise, are they supposed to believe in their expertise? Or question what's being "force fed?"
Mask, don't mask, double mask and in the end it's "mask don't work unless it's a properly fitted N-95 type mask." That's expertise?
You won't catch the virus or spread it if you're vaccinated. Now you need a booster, then another, then another—now they're up to what, six? Where's the expertise? Hell, Walensky testified before the Senate stating fully vaccinated individuals can’t pass Covid-19 to other people.
You must socially distance yourself by 6 ft. Then we find out it was arbitrary (from Dr. Birx's own admission.) Where's the expertise here?
The CDC comes out with one set of guidelines only to be changed to reflect others opinions (like the teachers association.) Where does the expertise lie here? Walensky or Weingarten?
It's quite ironic that Fauci told a group back in 2019 that we won't know the efficacy or side effects of drugs until three phases of trials had been completed. But now, there aren't side effects without trial phases. This is expertise?
We're told children need to have the shot. Based on what? We're told there are no ill effects from children getting the shot. We're told they spread the virus. Based on what?
After seeing these "experts" proven wrong in so many instances people who question, or don't believe, what they're being told are somehow "experts" as well? No, they're exercising common sense.
Now, let's add the attempts and laws that made these shots mandatory. I won't ask where the expertise is, but I will ask where's the logic? If they are truly experts here, why the need to censor those who questioned their actions? Are we not encroaching on propaganda again?
